The formal charges are:

Complaint made by Mr and Mrs B

1. You failed to act in a manner befitting a member of RICS when on 19 October 2014, during a site visit to the home of Mr and Mrs B, you made one or more of the following comments, or words to the same effect, to Mr B and/or Mr B Jra. [redacted]b. [redacted]c. [redacted] d. [redacted]

You are therefore in breach of Bye-Law 5.2.1(a) and are liable to disciplinary action in accordance with Bye-Law 5.2.2(a)

2. You failed to take appropriate steps to manage or avoid an actual or perceived conflict of interest when on 20 October 2014 you accepted an appointment as a party wall surveyor for Ms D in relation to a dispute with Mr and Mrs B, despite having been engaged in the confrontation referred to at charge 1 the day previous

Contrary to Rule 3 of the Rules of Conduct for Members 2007You are therefore liable to disciplinary action in accordance with Bye-Law 5.2.2(c)

3. You failed to act with integrity in that as the adjoining owner’s surveyor appointed by Mr and Mrs D under the Party Wall etc. Act 1996 (hereafter referred to as “the Act”):

a. On 23 December 2014, in conjunction with the building owner’s surveyor Mr S, you served a party wall award, on Mr and Mrs Bb. You knew or ought reasonably to have known that the content of that award was likely to be contentiousc. You were aware that there was statutory 14-day deadline in which to appeal that awardd. You delivered the award on this date in a deliberate attempt to frustrate Mr and Mrs B’s ability to appeal that award within that timeframe

Contrary to Rule 3 of the Rules of Conduct for Members 2007You are therefore liable to disciplinary action under Bye-Law 5.2.2 (a) or (c)

4. On 09 May 2017 you sent a letter to Mr and Mrs B containing a notification under S10(7) of the Act. Some or all of the issues raised in that letter related to Mr and Mrs B’s complaints and/or claims against you and did not relate to the dispute between Mr and Mrs B and Ms D. You knew or ought reasonably to have known that it was not appropriate to resolve these by way of a party wall award. By misrepresenting your ability to resolve those complaints and/or claims by way of an award pursuant to S10(7) of the Act, you failed to act with integrity.

Contrary to Rule 3 of the Rules of Conduct for Members 2007You are therefore liable to disciplinary action under Bye-Law 5.2.2 (a) or (c)

Complaint made by Mr and Mrs W

5. You failed to act in a manner befitting membership of RICS when, in direct response to an unfavourable Google review from Mr W dated 20 November 2015, you encouraged Mr G to refer a matter to you in your capacity as agreed surveyor, in circumstances where you knew or ought reasonably to have known that the costs in dispute were not ‘works pursuant to the Act’ and were not therefore recoverable under the Act.

You are therefore in breach of Bye-Law 5.2.1(a) and are liable to disciplinary action in accordance with Bye-Law 5.2.2(a)

6. As agreed surveyor purportedly appointed by Mr G and Mr and Mrs W under the Act, you made a party wall award dated 23 December 2015 in respect of matters that were not ‘matters arising out of or incidental to the dispute’. You did so to penalise Mr and Mrs W for leaving a negative Google review dated 20 November 2015: Particulars

a. Mr G referred this matter to you to consider whether the costs of £480 in respect of your invoice of 04 December 2012 were properly recoverable against Mr and Mrs Wb. You determined that Mr G was not entitled to claim the sum of £480 in respect of your costs as they related to costs incurred in obtaining party wall advice prior to service of notice under the Act.c. You proceeded to award Mr G a sum of £330.54 in respect of costs that had allegedly been incurred prior to the making of the award of 29 January 2013 but had not been included in that awardd. No documentary evidence was included to support the assertion that those fees had been incurrede. No good reason was provided for why these costs were not considered at the time of making the first award despite those costs allegedly being incurred prior to making the awardf. A further sum of £200 was awarded in respect for the inconvenience and time included in the referral, notwithstanding the fact that Mr G had made no such assertiong. The total sum of £530.54 was intended to penalise Mr and Mrs W by effectively compensating Mr G for the sum of £480 that he was unable to recover as per particulars (a) and (b) aboveh. Your award included provision that Mr and Mrs W paid to you the sum of £350 + Vat in respect of your own costs in making this award

Contrary to Rule 3 of the Rules of Conduct for Members 2007You are therefore liable to disciplinary action under Bye-Law 5.2.2(a) or (c)

7. You failed to act with integrity in that as a surveyor purportedly appointed by Mr G and Mr and Mrs W:

a. On 23 December 2015 you served a Party Wall Award on Mr and Mrs Wb. You knew or ought reasonably to have known that the content of that award was likely to be contentiousc. You were aware that there was statutory 14-day deadline in which to appeal that awardd. You delivered the award on this date in a deliberate attempt to frustrate Mr and Mrs W’s ability to appeal that award within that timeframe

Contrary to Rule 3 of the Rules of Conduct for Members 2007You are therefore liable to disciplinary action under Bye-Law 5.2.2 (a) or (c)

8. You failed to act with integrity when

a. on 12 April 2016 you made a Party Wall Award requiring Mr and Mrs W to pay your costs in challenging an award that you knew did not relate to ‘matters arising out of or incidental to the dispute ’as per charge 7 above; or b. on 12 April 2016 you made a Party Wall Award requiring Mr and Mrs W to pay a sum that related entirely to your costs in dealing with their service complaint against you.

Contrary to Rule 3 of the Rules of Conduct for Members 2007You are therefore liable to disciplinary action in accordance with Bye Law 5.2.2(a) or (c)

Complaint from Mr R

9. You failed to act with integrity when making and/or delivering an award dated 24 September 2015 in that:

a. You made an ex-parte award requiring the building owners to pay your fees totalling £17,990.94 plus interest. b. You posted the award to 59 Manor Road. c. You knew that this address was a building site at the time and any post sent to that address was unlikely to be received at all or in a timely mannerd. You sent this award by post only, despite related correspondence with Mr O and Mr R taking place via emaile. You were aware that there was statutory 14-day deadline in which to appeal that awardf. You made no reference to the award in email correspondence between 24 September 2015 and 12 October 2015g. You did not make reference to the award until you met with Mr R in person on 13 October 2015, after the deadline to appeal that award had expired h. You behaved in the manner described at particulars (a)-(g) above in an attempt to frustrate the building owner’s ability to challenge the award

Contrary to Rule 3 of the Rules of Conduct for Members 2007You are therefore liable to disciplinary action in accordance with Bye Law 5.2.2 (a) or (c)

10. You failed to co-operate fully with RICS staff in that you did not respond promptly, substantively or at all to any or all of the following letters from RICS